Statement on US government directive to suspend access to Fable 5 and Mythos 5

chickens -> roost

There is always way too much drama with Anthropic. They could've just called it 4.9, but no, they had to dramatize it to the max. Well, this is what happens. I'll just bypass all the drama and stick to Codex. I also don't want to unnecessarily pay 100x.

This is OpenAI and Meta using their leverage over the White House to screw over their competitor.

This is very transparently Trump admin retribution, and I'm surprised this fact is being so widely ignored.

Haven’t we learned by now that software is a commodity, and that revenue only comes from unique products and services?

On the one hand someone will subscribe $4.99 a month for TODO.app or calendar.com because they are paying for a solo dev or a small team to work on constant development and improvement of products filling a particular niche.

On the other hand, Linux, Django, PyTorch, React, Zed, Helix, Postgres, Arch, Chromium, Firefox, Rust, Python etc. ship continually improving, solid pieces of enormous infrastructure for free, to be used freely by all, off the back of hundreds if not thousands of active core developers. These projects and large and complicated. They are also commodities.

Then, ahem*, on the final hand there are of course Windows, Office, Adobe, macOS and iOS, et al which span both categories: monster projects that are also commercial and also commodities and yet they have hooked themselves into the world in such a way that most folks gotta pay for ‘em.

LLMs feel like they want to be in the same category as the OSs of yesteryear, with all the fanfare of major release versions named like 95, 98, 2000, XP… or like Leopard, Tiger, Yosemite, Sequoia. The training and evaluation pipelines might feel like they fall into those categories, but the models themselves — after all, distillations of someone else’s public or private IP — do not.

”In 1991, the United States Supreme Court in Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service Co ended a seventy year struggle among federal circuits concerning copyright protection of factual compilations. Prior to this decision, courts allowed copyright protection for works if the compiler labored over his project, whether or not the work involved originality or creativity.” **

It might seem like a trivialization, but aren’t LLMs just telephone directories? Except instead of phone numbers of a public phone system they contain weights of a mind that’s read a public library? Such works might or might not be proprietary based on “sweat of the brow” copyright laws.

* after Niven/Pournelle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Gripping_Hand …

** https://digitalcommons.law.uga.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?artic...